Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va'yish'lach (He sent)

Genesis 32:4 - 36:43

 "Then Ya'acov sent  [va’yishlach] messengers - "mal’a'chim" - before him to his brother Esau…"  (32:3). These are the opening words of our Parasha. "Mal'a’chim", as we know, are angels, messengers, or emissaries. Ya'acov had seen them in dreams (aside from the famous ladder scene in 28:12, an angel also addressed him in a dream in 31:10-13). He had also run into YHVH's messengers when he departed from Lah'van (32:1,2), and now he sends messengers, human “mal'a’chim”, to his brother Esav. The root of "mal'a’ch" (singular) is “la'a'ch” (lamed, alef, chaf), meaning "to send". It is from this verb (which is not in use as such) that we get the noun: "m’la'cha", occupation, work, workmanship (such as the service that was performed in the Mishkan), possession, and more. Later on, when Esav will propose that Ya'acov come along with him with his entire entourage, the latter will refuse and say that he will move "according to the pace of the cattle that are before him…" (33:14). "Cattle" (or “livestock”) here is also "m’la’cha", as the herds would typically go out ahead, or be sent forth in front of the retinue. When "YHVH rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done" (Gen. 2:2), it was His "m'la’cha" from which He had ceased. This is one example of how the Hebrew language is able to accommodate, as it were, in one word or term, cattle, angels, messengers, occupation, the holy service rendered unto YHVH in His Abode, and even His work of creation.

Such diverse ‘blends’ are not uncommon in Hebrew and provide a window into the thought pattern or mentality of the society that gave birth to them. When the root word for "work", for example, is "to send forth," what does it say about the society where this usage originated? What does it tell us about the basic understanding of the concept of "work" or "occupation"? It certainly speaks of production or labor that does not remain in confinement, or only within one's vicinity. Instead, it appears that the work is rendered or performed for the community and is viewed as a mission (by its very definition), and therefore cannot be considered incidental or self-serving. The word "m'la’cha" also refers to the one performing it, again, pointing to a member of a socially inclined community.  The content of the one and only proverb where "m'la’cha" is found validates what the etymology of this word reveals. Thus, Mishley (Proverbs) 24:27 reads, "prepare your work ("m'la’cha") outside, and make it ready for yourself in the field; afterwards, then, build your [own] house" (italics added).

Just before Ya'acov and company venture to cross the Yarden (Jordan) in anticipation of the unknown, the much-concerned Ya'acov prays for safety and deliverance. At the same time, he also expresses gratitude to the Elohim of his fathers, acknowledging his own unworthiness "of all the lovingkindness and of all the faithfulness which You have shown to Your servant; for with my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two companies (camps - ma'cha'not)" (32:10). The text of 32:11-12a is sung (in Hebrew) by Yonatan Razel. Here is the link:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEVRSKH54fs 

At the end of last week's Parasha, we noted the usage of "double camp" – “machanayim”. Here (in 33:1), Ya'acov actually divides his family into two (out of concern for their safety, but employing a strategy typical of his shrewd disposition). This division hints, yet again, at the future state of his house/family/progeny. We must note, however, that the present division does not conform to how the 'nation of Ya'acov' will eventually split up. In his prayer, in 32:10, he makes reference to having become “two camps” (translated “companies”), which, unlike last week’s “double camp”, here is a plain “shney machanot” (“machaneh” singular, “machanot” plural). When meeting up with his brother, Esav, the latter refers to Ya’acov’s family as a “machaneh” (33:8). In 32:21, Ya’acov is said to have “lodged that night in the camp”.

Shortly after, the following scene ensues: "Now he [Ya’acov] arose that same night and took his two wives, maids, and eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. Then Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak" (32:22, 24). Wrestle here, "(va)ye'a'vek", is remarkably similar to the proper name "Yabbok” – “Jabbok” (remember that in Hebrew b and v sounds are designated by the same letter), the root of both being a.v/b.k (alef, vet/bet, kof), forming the noun "ah’vak", which is “dust”. Naturally, an 'engagement' such as the one in which Ya'acov and the "man" were involved would have raised no small amount of dust. "Ah’vak" speaks of very fine dust, not the kind that is translated as "dust of the earth", which is "ah'far" (mentioned and discussed in Parashat Chayey Sarah in Gen. 23). The dust contained in the river's name, as well as in the verb chosen to describe Ya'acov's struggle with the unnamed person in the dark, add even more (proverbial) haziness and mystery to the already obscure event. Even Ya'acov's name change to “Yisra'el” is not quite clear. The reason for the change is given as, "For you have striven with Elohim and with men and have prevailed" (32:28). The name was bestowed in response to Ya'acov's demand to be blessed by the "man", whom he was not willing to release until and unless his request was granted. Additionally, the river’s name, “Yabbok”, may also be connected to the root b.k.k (bet, kof, kof), which forms the verb for to “empty out”, thus lending another possible perspective to the scene that had just been imposed upon Ya’acov/Yisrael.

The name “Yisra'el” is a composite word formed by the verb "sara" (s.r.h. sin, resh, hey), to “rule, persist, persevere, strive”, and "el" - “strong” or “mighty one”, from which the word “Elohim” is derived. What was meant by the declaration to Ya’acov, and in what way was his life, at least up to that point, congruent with the definition of this name? Were his 'dusty' struggles on behalf of self taken into account in this lofty pronouncement? Or was it simply a statement of facts, devoid of any qualitative and personal evaluations? Was the name Yisra’el and its meaning the Almighty's way of bestowing pure and unadulterated grace upon him, the name possessing more of a prophetic significance for a future day when Ya'acov would be empowered by his Elohim, rather than a description of present-day facts? Whether Ya’acov ‘merited’ this name at that moment, at least the persistence that he demonstrated that night did, to some degree, validate the meaning of the new name. Incidentally, if one were to read the consonants making up “Yisrael” without any vowels (which would have been absent in the original Scripture writings), it could be read as “yashar-el” – El is upright (and hence in the future even Yaacov-Yisrael will be ‘nicknamed’ Yeshurun – the one who has been made straight/upright).

When it was Ya'acov's turn to ask the ‘mystery man’ for his name, the response came in the form of a question: "Why is it that you ask my name?" (32:29). When Ma’no'ach (Manoah), Shimshon's (Samson) father, asked the very same question of the messenger ("mal’ach") who came to him, the response was "for it is wonderful" (Judges 13:18). Another one who has been conferred the name “wonderful” (counselor) is the “child who was born to us and the son who was given to us” (see Isaiah 9:6).  In the case before us the reply is followed by, "and he blessed him there". What was the blessing? Did it simply constitute the name change? Additionally, seeing that the story of Yaacov is so replete with “mal’achim” it is quite intriguing that in this particular episode the one, whom we just compared to the person who appeared before Shimshon’s parents, is not called a “mal’a’ch”, but rather “a man” – “ish”! But in Yaacov’s eyes, this “man” was Elohim Himself (see 32:31).*

That “mal’achim” are an inextricable part of Ya’acov’s life experience will become evident even later on, as even close to death and while about to bless Yosef’s sons,  when Ya’acov will reflect upon his life he will make reference to the “angel who redeemed me from all evil” and will even invoke him as the one who was to “bless the lads” (Gen. 48:16). In Hosea 12:4, the “man” whom Ya’acov struggled with, who as we noted was not defined as a “mal’ach” in the original scene, is recognized here as such.

After his first heavenly encounter, upon departing from the land, Ya’acov’s experience was marked by the  'Elohim of a place', as he deemed to have been in what he called, "the house of Elohim" (“bet El” - Gen. 28:16,17,19). However, now, upon his return, it is the "face of Elohim" that he encounters – “P'ni'el” (ref. 32:31). An echo of his P'ni'el experience may be detected in what he says to his brother Esav in their encounter in 33:10, "for I see your face (pa’ne'cha) as one sees the face of Elohim ("p'ney Elohim")" (italics added). Ya'acov's perspective certainly seems to have changed. Having seen "Elohim face to face", he is now able to view even Esav differently.

As he re-enters the land of his fathers, Ya'acov walks in the footsteps of his grandfather Avraham (see Gen. 13:6) and comes to Sh'chem (Shechem). His coming to that town after meeting his brother does not pass by unnoticed, "and Ya'acov came safely to the city of Shechem" (33:18 cf. 28:21, where Yaacov prayed for a safe return - shalom). The literal rendering here is, “Ya'acov came "shalem" -  that is, whole, in one piece and in peace to Sh'chem” ("shalem" of course being of the same root as "shalom"). Perhaps this is also an ironic preamble to the events about to unfold, which will turn out to be far from peaceful. Thus, the next chapter introduces us to the conflict between Ya'acov's family and the local populace.

In 34:21, the root sh.l.m comes up again when Cha’mor (Hamor) and his son Sh'chem attempt to talk the town folk into being circumcised. Included in what they said about Ya'acov and his family are also the following words: "these people are peaceful toward us…" - "sh'lemim," “wholehearted, with good intentions, undivided”. We soon learn that nothing could be further from the truth (see 34:25-29).

In chapter 35:1, Elohim tells Ya'acov to "rise ("kum") and go to Bet-El… and make an altar there to Elohim, who appeared before you…" Last week we noted that Ya'acov's call to "rise up" began when he first found himself in the "makom" (place) which he named Bet-El (ref 28:19). Now, having completed a full cycle, Ya'acov is to go back there and continue to "rise up." Truly, from that point onward, Ya'acov's ongoing maturation becomes evident. First, he orders his family to "put away the foreign gods which are among you…" (v. 2). In last week's Parasha (31:32b etc.) we saw that Ya'acov's household was not free of idolatry, indeed the ‘man about the house’ seemed to tolerate that state of affairs -  but not so now! After all the foreign idols and the earrings were gathered (some of which may have been part of the plunder of the Shechemites 34:29), Ya'acov buried them under the "ela", the terebinth tree (v.4). This small tree, along with the "alon" (“oak”) share the root "el", pointing to strength, and hence "el” - "god", which has been surfacing often in these narratives about Ya'acov. In fact, in these Parashot (plural for Parasha) the title "Elohim" (plural of "el"), rather than YHVH, seems to be more prevalent.  In verse 8 of our passage, Rivka's nurse D'vora (Deborah) dies and is buried under the "alon", and thus the place was named Alon Ba'chut ("oak of weeping"). Many other place names bear titles connected to the oak tree (Elon Moreh, Eloney - "oaks of…" – Mamreh, etc.), which is an indigenous tree and is known for its strength and rejuvenation ability. The oak and the terebinth have both remained symbols of strength and durability, and as such, the remnant of the Nation is compared to them in Yishayahu (Isaiah) 6:13: "Yet there will be a tenth portion… and it will again burn, like a terebinth or an oak whose stump remains when it is felled…." (italics added).

Back to our narrative in chapter 35, where Ya'acov calls his Elohim:  "The El who answered me in the day of my distress…" ("tzarati") (35:3, emphasis added).  Before that, in 32:7, we read that he "was terrified and distressed". The word for "distressed" there is "(va)ye'tzar". The two consonants (tz.r tzadi, resh) happen to be used in numerous other words such as “adversity, affliction, anguish, distress, tribulation or trouble”, and in several more such as tza'ar - sorrow; tzar - enemy, adversary; tzarar - bind, tie up, restrict, narrow, scant, cramped, a show of hostility, vexing; tzaraf - smelt, refine, test; matzref - a crucible or instrument of refining; tzir'ah - hornet; tzorev - burn, scorch; tzara'at - leprosy; batzoret - drought; matzor - siege; mitzrayim – straits, Egypt, and more. Yirmiyahu (Jeremiah) 30:7 contains a reference to "tzarat Ya'acov”, Ya'acov's trouble: "Alas! For that day is great, so that none is like it; and it is the time of Jacob’s trouble, but he shall be saved out of it".

Immediately after Dvorah’s burial, Elohim appears before Ya'acov once again, blessing and reminding him that his name is no longer Ya'acov, but Yisrael, repeating the promises He had given to his fathers (ref. 35:9-11). This is the first time that Elohim reveals Himself to Ya’acov also as El-Shaddai (the “breasted Elohim”). The death of the nursemaid signified severance (for Yisrael) from the natural “breasts” and having to now cling to Elohim’s.  In commemoration of the event, Ya'acov-cum-Yisrael sets up a pillar over which he pours oil (v. 14).

Next comes the birth of Binyamin, whom his mother named Ben-Oni, commonly translated “son of my sorrow”, although the usage of “on” as “strength” is much more prevalent. Thus, if the labor and birth of Binyamin (as the name is pronounced in Hebrew) drained all of Rachel’s energy and vigor, she could have easily meant his name to be   "son of my strength". His father, on the other hand, called him "Ben-Yamin", meaning "son of the right (hand)" (35:18). Naming him as he did, Ya'acov was actually conferring upon him a firstborn position, perhaps because he was the first and only one to be born in the Land. In B’resheet 49:3, in Ya’acov’s last words to his sons, he says about Reuven: “you are my firstborn, My might and the beginning of my strength…” “Strength” in this instance is also “on”. Thus a certain symmetry emerges here; Ya’acov’s last words to his sons echo the words of his beloved wife about the youngest son, who exhausted her strength, while Yisrael’s firstborn exhausted more than once his father’s expectations of being mighty and strong  (and hence ended up losing this position, see 1^st Chron. 5:1).

Upon Ra’chel’s death, Ya’acov set up a pillar on her grave (35: 20). Doing this he was actually repeating what he had done in verse 14 above after YHVH had talked to him. In both cases, it says, “va’ya’tzev ma’tze’va”, that is “and he placed a pillar”. The very act of placing, as well as the pillar itself, are of the root y.tz.v. (yod, tzadi, bet/vet), meaning to “station” or “take a stand”. Just as he did in last week’s Parasha (ref 28:18), Ya’acov again commemorates the events in his life with signposts. There is a significant reference to signposts and landmarks in Jeremiah 31:21 (while in Jer. 31:14-15 there is a reference to Rachel), where the command to the virgin daughter of Yisrael, using the same by-now-familiar verb, is issued: “set up” (signposts and landmarks) – ha’tzivi  (imperative, feminine, singular).

In chapter 36, the Parasha’s last, there is a short episode (verses 6 and 7), interposed in the record of Esav's progeny, which explains the physical separation of the brothers - Ya’acov and Esav: "For their property had become too great for them to live together, and the land where they sojourned could not sustain them because of their livestock". This is a clear echo from the past, reminding us of Avraham and Lot's separation (ref. Gen. 13:1-12). However, this piece of information is somewhat curious, because in 32:3 we are told that Esav’s dwelling place was in “Seir, in the country of Edom”. Could it be that up until Ya’acov’s return, his brother held on to the land on both sides of the River?

 Let us also take note of 36:12, which tells us that Esav's firstborn, Elifaz, had a firstborn by his concubine Timnah (who herself was of a noble family of the Horites, 36:22), whom he named Amalek. The latter was to become Yisrael's fiercest enemy. Being a firstborn (and a son of a firstborn), Amalek must have carried his grandfather Esav’s hatred for, and murderous impulse against Ya'acov, and has therefore always targeted the latter’s progeny, resulting in a state of perpetual animosity (ref. Gen. 27:41; Ex. 17:8-14, 16; Deut. 25:17-19).

 

* “Hypostatic union” is the theological term used for the ‘union’ of Messiah’s humanity and divinity.

Hebrew Insights into Parashat Va’ye’tze

 Parashat Va'ye'tze (“and he departed”, literally "and he came out") starts out with Yaacov the fugitive making his way from the land of Yisrael to Cha'ran (Haran). No sooner does he leave Be'er Sheva, “and he came upon a place" (Gen. 28:11). The verb “(va)yifga” indicates that "he happened", or even "stumbled upon" this location, as the sun was setting. That night Yaacov had a dream of “angels” – “mal'a'chim” (ref. v. 12) - ascending and descending a ladder. At the end of the Parasha (and twenty years later), while by himself (although far from being alone), Yaacov once again will "happen”, or "chance" to come across “mal'a'chim” (translated "messengers"), using the same Hebrew verb that we encountered above (“va'yif'ge'u”, ref. 32:1, translated "met" in English). ”Chance" and "messengers of YHVH" are therefore the two elements framing the time capsule of Yaacov's Diaspora experience. The verb “paga” (root p.g.a., pey, gimmel, ayin), seems to point out that from Yaacov's point of view, or experience, the circumstances and the messengers were just ‘chance occurrences’ that he did not plan for nor anticipate. The ‘master planner’ and ‘conniver’ was no longer in command! In fact, he was more like a pawn, or an actor who was taking part in a great dramatic scheme directed by someone other than himself.

Thus, although the opening verse of the Parasha seems to indicate that Yaacov had in mind a set destiny, his path took him to a less defined and (quite likely) less desired place. We just noted that "he came upon a place…” and that “he stopped over for the night because the sun had set…" (28:11). The circumstances were imposed upon Yaacov, and so he stopped at what was a mere "place" (only later, in verse 19, do we find out that there was a town there). As Yaacov lay down, using a stone for a pillow, he had the aforementioned dream, during which Elohim promised to give him the “a’retz” (“ground, land”) that he was lying upon (v. 13), and to bring him back to this very “adama” (“soil”, v. 15; see Parashot* B’resheet – 2:6, and Toldot – 25:25). But as if to suggest that there was a greater dimension (a ‘heavenly’ one) attached to this plot of land and to the very promise, the word was given in a most awesome manner, with YHVH being described as standing above a ladder that connected heaven and earth (while the angels were ascending and descending). Yaacov, therefore, deemed this place to be the "house of Elohim and the gate of heaven" (28:17). The "sulam" – ladder – was linking the earthly with the heavenly, mentioned only once in Scripture. The root s.l.l. (samech, lamed, lamed) means to "elevate, raise up" (e.g. Ps. 68:4) and also "paving an ascending path", or "an ascending path" (e.g. Numbers 20:19). The rungs of this ladder certainly symbolized the path destined for Yaacov's future generations, who were to lift up the One who stood above it.  This future is well described by the prophet Yishayahu: "Go through, go through the gates! Prepare the way for the people; Build up, build up the highway [solu, solu, ha'mesila]! Take out the stones, lift up a banner for the peoples!" (Isaiah 62:10 emphasis added). Or put differently, in the words of the Apostle Paul: "I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of Elohim in Messiah Yeshua" (Philippians 3:14 emphasis added), who said of Himself: "…you shall see heaven open, and the angels of Elohim ascending and descending upon the Son of Man" (John 1:51).

Yaacov not only "happened" by this "place", but he also used one of the stones of the "place" for a pillow. He lay down in this "place" and discovered that YHVH was in the "place", and that this "place" was truly awesome! Finally, he named the "place" Bet-El - the "house of Elohim" (28:11,16,17,19). The Hebrew word for "place" is “ma'kom,” of the root k.o.m (kof, vav, mem), meaning to "rise up". This particular “makom” was indeed the location where Yaacov's call to rise up was starting to resound! Almost twenty years from the current scene, Yaacov will be making a demand (addressing his father-in-law), to go back to his “place” (30:25). Being about to leave Lav’han’s estate with his wives, children, and livestock, we read: “Then Jacob rose up…” – va’ya’kam (31:17). We cannot leave Yaacov and “makom” without mentioning “y’kum”, which is translated “all living things”, and is found in B’resheet (Genesis) 7:4, 23, in reference to that which YHVH created (but which He also destroyed).

Needing something tangible to mark his experience, Yaacov picked up the stone on which he had rested his head, lifted it up as a column, and poured oil on top of it (28:18). After naming the place, he made an oath promising to make YHVH his Elohim (providing his conditions are met), adding, "This stone… shall become Elohim's house" (v. 22). Next, we meet the Patriarch-to-be at his desired destination. Upon seeing his beautiful cousin, he mustered up an inordinate amount of vigor, which enabled him to roll a large stone off the "mouth of the well", a feat that ordinarily required several people to accomplish (ref. 29:8-10). Toward the end of the Parasha (in 31:45-47), the covenant made between Yaacov and his father-in-law, Lah'van (Laban), was also marked by a stone, which he again placed uprightly, as well as by a heap of stones which he named "gal'ed", "a witness heap” (31:45-46). Apparently during that season in Yaacov’s life, the "e'vehn" (“stone”) became a marker (‘milestone’) of significant events and experiences.

Many years later, when the elderly Yaacov would pronounce blessings upon his sons on his deathbed, he will give his favorite one, Yosef (Joseph), the longest and most complex of the blessings. In the course of his pronouncement, Yaacov will make mention of the Mighty One of Yaacov, the Shepherd and Stone of Israel - E'vehn Yisrael, all these being titles of YHVH (Gen. 49:24 emphasis and italics added).  This is the only time that specific mention is made of the "Stone of Israel" in the entire Holy Writ, and not surprisingly it was uttered by the mouth of the one who walked a path made up of many stepping stones. Later on in the Word, more stones are uncovered: "the stone which the builders rejected, [and which] has become the chief cornerstone" (Ps. 118:22), as well as the "stone to strike and a rock [tzur] to stumble over" for "the two houses of Israel" (Yaacov's progeny – Yishayahu/Isaiah 8:14, literal translation). Then there is the stone that was laid in Zion, "a tried stone, a tested stone, a costly cornerstone for the foundation…" about which it is said that "he who believes in it [Him] will not be disturbed" (Is. 28:16). Finally, the stone which hit Nebuchadnezzar’s giant statue shattering it to pieces, “became a great mountain and filled the whole earth” (ref. Daniel 2:31-35). Interestingly, the word "e'vehn", which is spelled alef, bet/vet, noon, if read without vowels can be broken up into two words: "av-ben", that is: "father-son". References to Yeshua as the “shepherd” (cf. Matt. 2:6; John 10:2 ff), as well as to the stone/rock (ref. 1st Cor. 10:4) would make Yaacov’s coinage of the term “Shepherd, Stone of Israel”, quite prophetic.

Being a member of the family of Be'tu'el (Bethuel) and Lah'van, Ra’chel's name, not unlike that of her aunt Rivka, is associated with the family business, as “Ra’chel” means a "ewe." Yaacov mentioned Lah'van's ewes and female goats in 31:38 when he lodged his complaint about the lifestyle and conditions that were imposed on him by his father-in-law during their twenty-year association. Ewes as “ra'chel” (plural “r'che'lim”) are mentioned rather rarely in the Tanach, one of those few instances being Yishayahu 53:7, where the Messiah is described as "a ewe - 'ra'chel' - before its shearers".

Whereas Yaacov’s mother Rivka watered the entourage of Avraham’s servants and livestock, in the present episode by the well, her son is the one watering the flocks of his uncle (ref. 29:10). Next Yaacov proceeds to kiss his cousin. In Hebrew these two actions are described thus: “va’ya’shk et hatzon” (and he watered the flocks); “va’yishak… le’Rachel” (“and he kissed… Rachel”). Noticed the alliteration employed here, hinting at what will soon transpire in Yaacov’s life – “watering” (work) in exchange for “kissing” (marrying the one he loved). Shortly afterward, Yaacov is greeted by his uncle, Lah’van, with a kiss. “He embraced him and kissed him” (29:13) uses “va’ye’na’shek” (the more common form of this verb), with the ending being – neshek – which is also the noun for “weapon/s” or, in biblical Hebrew, also for “battle” (e.g. Ps. 140:7; 2nd Kings 10:2; Ezekiel 39:9,10 etc.). Indeed, Lah’van’s initial greeting, with a hug and a kiss, will soon turn into a relationship that is characterized by battles and struggles (Cf.  Proverbs 27:6, where "he who hates bestows abundant kisses", literal translation).

Prior to being united with his beloved, Yaacov was ‘blinded’ into marrying her older sister, whose eyes are described as “delicate” (“ra’kot” in Hebrew). As we remember Yaacov himself took advantage of his father’s blindness to take away the birthright blessing from Esav (ref. 27:36), the word for birthright being “b’chora” (as we saw last week). Upon Yaacov lodging a complaint with his father-in-law, Lah’van, as to having been cheated, the latter retorts by saying: “It is not the practice in our place, to marry off the younger before the first-born – b’chira” (29:36). These events and the terms used in both episodes form quite a tit-for-tat symmetry. But the theme of blindness and firstborn doesn’t end there. When the time came for Yaacov to bless his progeny, starting with his choice of Ephraim and Mensahe, his son Yoseph was quite taken aback when he saw his, now blind, father switching the places of the grandsons. This time, however, impairment of sight did not get in the way, and the elderly Patriarch knew exactly who was in front of him and what he was about to bequeath to each one (ref. chapter 48).

Eleven of Yaacov's twelve sons were born in Cha'ran. Leh'ah gave birth to the first four, whose names express her attempts at appeasing her husband. The firstborn was therefore named - Re’u’ven - meaning, "behold, a son". Next is Shim'on, whose name stems from the verb "to hear" (indicating that her plea for another son has been heard by Elohim). Following him is Leh'vi, of the root "to accompany" (being sure now that upon his birth her husband will ‘accompany’ her). Leh'ah's fourth son was Yehuda, whose name is related to "giving thanks" or "praise". Ra’chel's maid, Bil’ha, whom the former gave to her husband so that she could be (literally) built through her, is next in line.  Rachel used the same words as Sarah did in relationship to Hagar (ref. Gen. 16:2. As we saw there in “being built” – ebaneh – are also embedded the letters for “ben,” son). Her anguish about being barren came to the fore in the names that she gave the sons that her maid bore to Yaacov. The meaning of the name of the first, Dan, is "judgment", or "dispensing justice/vindication". Bilha's second son was Naphtali, meaning "writhing" or "twisting", and by implication "struggle" (denoting Ra’chel's struggle with her sister). However, Leh'ah was not going to stand by and allow her sister to be "built up" through her maid (30:3). Thus, she too gave her maid, Zilpah, to her husband, hoping to have more sons through her. Zilpah birthed Gad, meaning "fortune" (as in "luck"). However, the pronouncement made then by Leah – “ba-gad” –  as she named this one, may also mean “he betrayed” (perhaps in reference to Yaacov’s relationship with her). Zilpa’s next pregnancy yielded Asher, whose name is of the root "happiness". Leh'ah's words, "I am blessed [or happy], for the daughters shall call me blessed" (30:13), recall the words of Miriam (Mary), Yeshua's mother, upon the birth of her Son (ref. Luke 1:48). Leh’ah herself birthed the next one, and named him Yisas'char, from the root to "hire", since she became pregnant with him upon "hiring" Yaacov from Ra’chel for a 'fee,' in the form of a mandrake plant that was picked by Re'uven. But once the baby was born, Leh'ah recalled the other meaning of the name, which is "wages", saying: "Elohim has given me my wages, because I gave my maid to my husband" (30:18). Leh'ah's sixth son was Z'vulun, whose name stems from the rare “zeved”, which means "endowment or gift”. But Leh'ah did not stop there, she said, “now will my husband dwell with me” (30:20). “Dwell” here is “yizbeleni”, which can also mean “honor me”.  Thus, this son’s name, as is the case with some of his siblings’ names, has a twofold meaning, in spite of the root of the words not being identical.

As we have seen frequently, it is not always the grammatical accuracy that is prominent, as is evident also in this narrative, but rather associative thinking which is often prevalent in the Biblical text (and the Hebraic mindset).

After Leh’ah gave birth to Dinah (whose name, like Dan’s, means "judgment" or "justice"), Ra’chel's desire was granted her and she too bore a son. "Elohim has taken away (a'saf) my reproach, [and] she named him Yosef, saying, 'may YHVH add (yosef) to me another son'" (v. 23, 24 emphases added). While Ra’chel was contemplating how her shame and disgrace were being removed by giving birth, she was also expressing hope that this one, who opened up her womb, will serve as a signal for more to follow. The two words, “asaf” (a.s.f., alef, samech, fey), here "take away" while literally "to gather", and “yasaf” (y.s.f., yod, samech, fey) "to add" and "to repeat", are related both in sound and meaning. When looking down the road of history these two words become prophetically significant. Yosef certainly was "added to" by his brother Binyamin (Benjamin), and also by receiving a double portion among the tribes of Yisrael when each of his sons became a tribe in his own right. Prophecy predicts the ingathering of the House of Yosef (and "his companions") on a future day, thus fulfilling the second meaning of his name (see Ez. 37:19).

The two 'camps' of Yaacov's descendants are alluded to at the end of the Parasha. In 32:1-2 Yaacov, as we pointed out before, meets the angels or messengers of YHVH, upon whose sight he exclaims: "This is the camp [or encampment] of Elohim’, and he named the place Ma'cha'na'yim". “Ma'cha'na'yim” is indicative of a double form of “ma'cha'neh”, meaning “camp”. What did Yaacov see when he looked at this ‘band of angels’? What was it about them that caused him to refer to a "camp" or to an "encampment", and why a double one?

In next week's Parasha we will see how, for strategic reasons, Yaacov will divide up his family into two companies (literally “camps”), before going to meet his brother Esav. Was the idea already brewing in his mind when he saw the angels/messengers, and thus he projected duality to their "camp"? Or was it the messengers from YHVH who advised him to so divide up his family before the crucial meeting? Perhaps through something they said or did, he learned that in the future his family would divide up into two camps. Is there a direct connection between the angels who were ascending and descending the ladder, when he first departed from the land of Yisrael, and these particular “mal'achim” here, who greeted him upon his return? Was YHVH thus reminding him of His promises?

We cannot leave our Parasha without examining the verb “to steal” – which occurs eight times in chapter 31 and is used (in Hebrew) in a number of ways. In verse 19 we learn that Ra’chel stole the household idols, and immediately following that it says: “and Jacob stole away”, literally “stole the heart” (of Lav’han). The latter accused his nephew of “stealing away”, with once again the literal rendering being “stealing my heart”, then of “stealing away” – literally “stealing me”, and what’s more, of “stealing the household idols” (vs. 26, 27, 30). In Yaacov’s retort against those accusations, he said, among other things: “These twenty years I have been with you; your ewes and your female goats have not miscarried their young, and I have not eaten the rams of your flock.  That which was torn by beasts I did not bring to you; I bore the loss of it. You required it from my hand, whether stolen by day or stolen by night” (vs. 38-39 italics added). However, the Hebrew rendering of the last expression is: “I was stolen by day and stolen by night” – “ganov gnuvti” (g.n.v, gimmel, noon, bet/vet), describing Yaacov’s state of vulnerability while with his employer. Many years later, his favorite son, Yosef, will repeat these very words while in the Egyptian jail: "For indeed I was stolen away – gunov gunavti - from the land of the Hebrews” (Gen. 40:15).  

Stealing and the fear of such are generally connected to the accumulation and protection of wealth and property. Verse 18 in chapter 31 certainly underscores how much the protagonists value their property. Let’s take a closer look at what is being said here: “And he carried away all his livestock and all his possessions which he had gained, his acquired livestock which he had gained in Padan Aram, to go to his father Isaac in the land of Canaan”. “Livestock” is “mikneh” – that which is purchased (k.n.h – to purchase). In both “acquired” and once again in “livestock” the same root of “purchase” is employed. The wording of this sentence, with all of its repetitions, makes up a very vivid picture of the attitude toward the amassed material goods. Yaacov’s fear is also seen in verse 42 when he calls upon the “Elohim of Avraham and the fear of Yitzchak”. This fear is “pachad”, dread, and not the “fear – awe, respect - of YHVH” – which is “yir’ah”. It seems here that Yaacov feels that it is only by the merit of his forefathers that he can address Elohim, while sadly the three-strand cord between himself, his father, and their Elohim is characterized by… fear.

 

*Parashot, plural for “Parasha” (while “Parashat” is

“Parasha of…”)

Shield/Star of David

 Regretfully, over the past several years, subtle anti-Semitism has been creeping into and growing within the Hebrew Roots movement (being a self-defeating oxymoron), and more recently, it seems that Jew-hatred has been spreading far and wide. It is not surprising, therefore, that one of Judaism’s expressions, which directly affects the Jewish people and the State of Israel, is the interpretation or meaning attributed to the Star of David (the “Magen David” as it is called in Hebrew, “the Shield of David”).  Among the numerous symbols used in the world, there are, for example, the symbols of the written languages, that is, the letters, but what renders each of them its meaning? 

So let’s view the “Shield of David.” It is made up of two equilateral triangles that were joined together in days of long ago. Later, it was used by other people or groups who adopted that geometric shape and may have given it their own interpretation.  But what is a symbol or any given object?  In and of itself, it has no intrinsic meaning.  A five-year-old could look at the six-pointed star, and it would mean nothing to him, other than being an object to handle.  He could play with it all day, and it would still remain a plaything to him.  But a parent may come by and tell the child that this star is what King David inscribed on the shields of his mighty men.  A little while later, another person may come by, declaring to the child that this object, with its particular shape, came from the devil and is very dangerous to look at or touch.  So now the child puts the two together and decides that King David and his mighty men were evil, as would be anyone else who associates himself with this hexagonal shape.

The Scriptures discuss how symbols and objects can become idols.  Paul states, “We know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is no other Elohim but one” (1 Corinthians 8:4).  In other words, it doesn’t matter what we call an object. Even if we attribute to it divine and supernatural characteristics, it is still just an object which cannot give life or anything else, and as such it will never animate itself, as it states:  “They have mouths, but they do not speak; eyes they have, but they do not see; they have ears, but they do not hear; nor is there any breath in their mouths. Those who make them are like them; so is everyone who trusts in them” (or attributes any capabilities to them. Psalm 135:16-18 emphasis added).  Hence if man applies his knowledge to that article (Paul called this knowledge “food” given to an idol), and then believes that it can somehow give back to him some kind of edification or information – good or bad - then the object becomes that idol, for good or bad.  YHVH further chides Israel for such stupidity: 

“He cuts down cedars for himself, and takes the cypress and the oak; He secures it for himself among the trees of the forest. He plants a pine, and the rain nourishes it.  Then it shall be for a man to burn, for he will take some of it and warm himself; yes, he kindles it and bakes bread; indeed he makes a god and worships it; he makes it a carved image, and falls down to it.  He burns half of it in the fire; with this half he eats meat; he roasts a roast, and is satisfied. He even warms himself and says, ‘Ah! I am warm, I have seen the fire.’  And the rest of it he makes into a god, his carved image. He falls down before it and worships it, prays to it and says, ‘Deliver me, for you are my god!’  They do not know nor understand; for He [YHVH] has shut their eyes, so that they cannot see, and their hearts, so that they cannot understand.  And no one considers in his heart, nor is there knowledge nor understanding to say, ’I have burned half of it in the fire, yes, I have also baked bread on its coals; I have roasted meat and eaten it; and shall I make the rest of it an abomination? Shall I fall down before a block of wood?’" (Isaiah 44:14-19, see also Jeremiah 10:1-50).

Astrology is one of those disciplines that attaches knowledge to inanimate objects; someone ascribes to the heavenly bodies certain characteristics, making it known to others who, in turn, believe this ‘information’ which originated in that someone’s imagination, or from a spiritual influence exercised upon that imagination. Although the Creator did give the sun, moon, and stars influential governance over the elements of the creation (see Genesis 1:14-18). 

As mentioned above, Paul calls this knowledge “food” that is offered to an object or symbol (idol), and then goes on to warn his readers not to partake of this so-called knowledge.  Nowadays, the computer, with its varied and advanced technologies and capabilities, is a case in point. All the sources of the knowledge it contains had to originate from man, but it is so easy to forget that fact and ascribe the data it holds to this technological device. Thankfully, we do not worship the computer, although it is possible to become dependent on it and to trust it to the point of being unable to function without it (as if it will “never leave or forsake” us). 

All this was to bring us back to our original subject. At present some ‘ministries’ are engaged in propagating what Elohim calls “foolishness” (see 1 Cor. 3:19). One, for example, put out a long occultic dissertation on the meaning of the symbol on the flag of Israel, with its associations being akin to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (a foul and contrived publication that helped fuel the Holocaust).  

I would like to offer another definition of that symbol with a more positive outlook.  When David conquered Jerusalem, he united the two Israels (the northern tribes with Judah, located in the southern region).  But after the reign of Solomon YHVH, in accordance with His word and will, divided the kingdom into two.  And so, if we separate the two triangles by taking the one pointing down and raising it until its tip touches the tip of the other triangle, label the one above Ephraim and the one below Judah, and an hourglass has just been formed. This may be a good description of this symbol, as the two separate sticks/nations indicate that YHVH has Ephraim and Judah in His time schedule for the fulfillment of His prophesied plans.  The Apostles preached what is called the Hope of Israel, which is the reunification and restoration of the Kingdom of Elohim to the whole House of Israel. So let us use this Shield of David as a symbol of that future hope, when the Messiah son of David (whom we believe is Yeshua) fulfills His mandate as our kinsman redeemer (see Acts 3:19-21).

 Ephraim

 

ONE Vision

 Shalom Fellow Zionist Israelite,

All of us who claim to be believers in the "Gospel of the Kingdom" must be united around “ONE” Vision.  I want to suggest what that “ONE vision" might be.

This vision has been with the believers, known or unknown, from the beginning of the ecclesia.  It has been proclaimed and read in every generation. I, for example, was brought up in the Lutheran tradition, and I had friends who were Catholic. All of us believed, or at least were aware of it. In the Christmas pageants, the children recited it by heart. But for most, that was the end of its significance and relevance. 

We are now in a season of deepening darkness. We cannot help but notice the spirit behind anti-Semitism that opposes the Jewish people, the nation of Israel, and Zionism.  Anyone in the “church” who is for the Jews, supports Zionism, and the Jewish nation is included in the above list of the vilified, which gives all the more reason to embrace this “One Vision”. What is that vision?  It is the vision of our Heavenly Father; it is the very purpose for which Yeshua came into this world. Elohim sent a messenger to a young maid with these words:  "Do not be afraid, Miriam, for you have found favor with Elohim.  And behold, you will conceive in your womb, and bear a son, and you shall name Him Yeshua.  He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High; and Adoni Elohim will give Him the throne of His father David; and He will reign over/in the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom will have no end" (Luke 1:30-33).  Isaiah prophesied this in chapter 49:5-6:  "And now says YHVH, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, to bring Jacob back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (For I am honored in the sight of YHVH, And My Elohim is My strength). He says, 'It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations, so that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth'". 

As a kinsman Redeemer, Yeshua came to restore the House of Jacob, “all Israel”, and to establish in that House the Kingdom of His heavenly Father, fulfilling His mission to be a light to the nations through them.

This is the One Vision that we should all hold close to our hearts. If the organization or church that you belong to doesn’t have that vision as its primary goal, ask them to consider making it so.

Signposts' Mystery

 Jeremiah chapter 31 is packed with prophetic information, especially as it pertains to the House of Israel/Ephraim. The references to this house range from "a people" (am, v. 1) to "watchmen" (v. 4), to "virgin daughter" (of Israel, v. 21), through to Ephraim as an individual (v. 20) and more.  Each of these metaphors is related to another aspect of this House's future destiny.

Among the many details enumerated in this outstanding chapter, the process of salvation, redemption, and restoration to the land is also depicted, with repentance being a major phase in this process.

One particular aspect of the return (i.e., restoration to the land) is described in verse 21, where Israel is addressed as "a virgin": "Set up for yourself roadmarks, place for yourself guideposts; Direct your mind to the highway, the way by which you went. Return, O virgin of Israel, return to these your cities". The word for "roadmarks" in Hebrew is "tzi'yu'nim" (singular - "tzi'yun"), a word that is reminiscent of "tzi'yon" – Zion. But even more striking is the word for "guideposts", which is "tamrurim" (singular – "tamrur"). A few verses above, we read:  "Thus says YHVH, 'a voice is heard in Ramah, lamentation and bitter weeping. Rachel is weeping for her children; she refuses to be comforted for her children, because they are no more'" (Jeremiah 31:15). In Hebrew Rachel's "bitter weeping" is… "b'chi (weeping) tamrurim (bitter)", being the same word we just encountered for "guideposts". "Tamrurim' are also found in Hosea 12:14, where it says: "Ephraim has provoked to anger most bitterly [tamrurim]; Therefore his Lord [in Hebrew "his adon"] will leave the guilt of his bloodshed upon him, and return his reproach upon him".

This serious charge against Ephraim is reversed in Jeremiah 31 with, firstly, Rachel's bitter ("tamrurim") weeping over her captive and lost sons, but about whom Elohim says: "Restrain your voice from weeping, and your eyes from tears; For your work shall be rewarded,' declares YHVH, 'and they shall return from the land of the enemy.  And there is hope for your future,' declares YHVH, 'and your children shall return to their own territory'" (Jeremiah 31:16-17). Secondly, the next verses (18-19) express Ephraim's deep repentance, with the following verse (20) being the most endearing and loving address of Abba toward this returning prodigal.

But now we must ask ourselves, how is it that at this stage "tamrurim" – "bitterness" – transitions into "guideposts"? As we saw above, the call to the Virgin Daughter of Israel is to "Direct your mind to the highway, the way by which you went. Return, O virgin of Israel, return to these your cities". The "guideposts" are supposed to lead the now-redeemed Israel to turn back, retrace her steps, and return by the way in which she went. This path of repentant return is, therefore, to be replete with an awakening, even to the point that the forgetfulness that characterizes Joseph's children (being in a state of "Menashe" – forgetfulness) is to be erased, giving way to a revival of memories of not only the sins committed against YHVH in the land of Israel, but also in the sojournings of each respective historic diaspora/land of exile. Abba is well able to revive and jar one's memory, ancestral history and annals, to fill the void of 'no-memory' and lack of historical background.

Unlike Judah, whose wanderings among the peoples are well-documented and etched in their souls, so to speak, Ephraim/Israel is devoid of such documented history (other than the Bible, of course). Without knowledge of the past, one's present identity is often unclear. But is it possible that in Ephraim's mandatory bitter weeping of repentance, Abba is saying that the journey back to Him, to his brethren, and to the land can and will be led by literal and historical "guideposts" necessary for the restoration to be complete? To reiterate, the "bitter weeping" of repentance, leading to the unveiling of one's past, is the path of Ephraim-Israel-Virgin-Daughter's gradual return.

Through Messiah's grace, Mother Rachel's bitter weeping intercession has ended. But not so for her children. In their season of awakened memory, bitter weeping becomes a guide to the roads that lead to Zion.